It is well known in the airborne launching of such devices as missiles, bombs or weather monitors to utilize an aircraft equipped with a launcher that includes a rotary carrier which is adapted to carry a number of such devices or "stores" at circumferentially spaced locations. The rotary carrier is able to sequentially index the stores into launch position for launching thereof from the aircraft. Typically, such launchers retain the stores by means of latch sets which are located about the circumference of the rotary carrier with each set being individually operable by suitable controls to release the store secured thereby. Prior airborne launch systems also have commonly employed ejection apparatus for ejecting a store clear of the aircraft upon release of the store from its carrier. The prior art is replete with examples of such airborne launching systems, the following U.S. Pat. Nos. being exemplary: 2,826,120, 2,905,055, 2,971,731, 3,295,410, 3,756,545, 3,936,019, 3,960,051, 3,974,990, 4,040,334, 4,088,287, 4,187,761 and 4,333,384.
In many prior rotary launch systems an ejector is provided for each store carrier location on the rotary carrier and all such ejectors are mounted on the rotary carrier for rotation therewith. This has resulted in unduly complex ejection systems and the considerable duplication of hardware resulting from use of a number of identical ejectors.
In other prior rotary launch systems a rotary store carrier is rotationally affixed to a rotary axle for rotation therewith. The rotating axle of such prior rotary carrierswas required to be of sufficient structural integrity to support the loads applied thereto in any rotary position. The applied loads would consist generally of the combined weight of the rotary carrier and the stores carried thereby acting in a vertical plane, and the torque load of a partially empty rotary carrier in which those store locations to one side of the central vertical plane and approaching the 6 o'clock (launch) position carry stores whereas the store locations on the opposite side of the central vertical plane are empty. To support these loads, the structural strength of prior rotating axles in planes other than the vertical plane has far exceeded the strength required by the expected loading in such other planes in order to assure that the axle would accommodate the loads applied in the vertical plane as the axle rotates with the rotary carrier. Prior rotary carriers thus have been considerably over-designed and unduly wasteful of the potential aircraft payload and cargo capacity. The above-mentioned duplication of ejector system hardware has further aggrevated the waste of potential aircraft payload.
Prior art of ejector systems for both rotary and other airborne launch systems have included pyrotechnic type systems which employ pyrotechnic cartridges to produce, upon ignition thereof, a rapidly expanding volume of hot gases that is channeled to an ejector device. The ejector device contacts a store to forcefully eject the store clear of the aircraft. Such prior ejector systems exhibit considerable sensitivity to the quantity, composition and quality of the explosive load in the cartridge, are subject to post-ignition residue accumulation in the ejector system which necessitates frequent cleaning and maintenance, and are limited to a single shot operating cycle for a given mission. These undesirable characteristics of pyrotechnic ejectors are manifested in the need for on-the-ground rearming and servicing of each ejector to be used during a subsequent mission, and the inability of such ejectors to accommodate inflight repair, replacement or rearming.
A related undesirable aspect of pyrotechnic ejectors is the inability to disarm a loaded ejector by any means other than ejection of the store. Thus, an aircraft carrying unlaunched stores would have to land with the pyrotechnic ejectors of the unlaunched stores still armed. This represents a hazardous and potentially catastrophic mode of operation in the event of certain ejector malfunctions or inadvertent ejector operation in that many prior pyrotechnic ejectors offer no assured safe mode of inflight failure or inactivation. Other prior ejector systems, mechanical spring bias ejectors for example, also have not been adapted for inflight maintenance, repair, replacement, disarming or rearming.